This post was triggered and complimentary to Bob Mosher’s post on 11/17…an important read that I agree with completely. What I offer today is an attempt to articulate a “Yes and…” in this post. The Critical Skills Analysis (CSA) used in the 5 Moments of Need methodology is extremely essential for distinguishing what can be addressed via formal training and what can...and should...be addressed in the workflow…not to mention where to focus priority. Check it out! (more…)

It’s Saturday morning, and am fully caffeinated…sitting on the deck and nursing on the business end of a fairly decent cigar. It’s odd moments like these that a craving to rip out a blog post gets flung upon me. Out of the blue a question landed on my brain and I thought was significant enough to help make the point I seem to endlessly make on my previous posts. Training alone does NOT drive performance, it only contributes to potential. I know, I know, those of you who keep coming…

I was recently drawn into a discussion on LinkedIn while trolling one of my groups to comment on a topic “How long should micro-Learning be?” Great question and timely since micro-learning (ML) seems to be receiving a lot of press lately. My answer was simply, “It should be long enough!” Hey now…that’s better than the stock performance consultant response of “It depends!” But it does depend…it depends on whether you are looking through a training lens or a performance lens. (more…)

Why build training content as a priority if there is an asset you could build that closes an existing performance gap? I’m not saying “forget training”; rather, I'm suggesting that closing the performance gap should be FIRST PRIORITY. Designing and building an asset to support performance at the Point-of-Work is actually one of the first steps that shape the core premise of Intentional Design. (See Figure #1) AND...the asset may well wind up in Training...just not as a priority. (more…)

Boss: “I have some unfortunate news.” Me: (thinking to myself) ‘Here we go…again…’ Boss: “Your position has been eliminated effective a week from Friday.” Me: “Hmmm, something tells me this is not a joke.” Boss: “I’m sorry. This is no joke.” Bah-dump-tssshhh! (Not sure that’s the correct spelling for a rim shot, but that’s the audio clip that played in my head.) (more…)

<Rant> To answer the question suggested by the title I offer another question – “Who gives a rip?” – as long as the end-game drives sustained workforce capability. The correct ratio is only correct if the end-game is reached. (more…)

Recently, I learned that it takes approximately 30 square miles of ocean for a loaded oil tanker to reverse course 180 degrees. That seems like a lot of ocean, but then, that’s a lot of boat to turn around – and a lot of momentum related to the existing course direction. It’s funny how momentum proves to be the primary challenge and source of resistance when standing in the way to a change in direction. While 30 square miles represents useless trivia, the significance and parallels represented by factors of…

<Rant Alert> Sorry, but this had to happen sooner than later, and I don’t expect a tidal wave of agreement...a few ripples will do. Even early warning signs of a tsunami are as subtle as the tide slowly receding from the shore. Yeah, this is about Performance Support…you expected something different from me? Ain’t happenin’! I’m done filling sandbags to protect the institution of training. You’ll find me on a board swimming out to catch the wave of root causes. (more…)

Choosing to use “disruption” twice in the same statement, especially regarding the discipline of embedded performance Support [EPS] is not just a tactic to form a snappy title. The reason is bigger than that. Does adopting EPS as a discipline really have to be disruptive? Any good consultant would answer a question like that with two simple words, “It depends!” Why? Because there is more than one disruption going on when choosing to pursue the EPS discipline. (more…)

Charles Jennings and his team at the 70:20:10 Forum are doing remarkable work in positioning an innovative learning blend that is becoming widely pursued and known as simply 70:20:10. Many organizations are either adopting this new “blend” or are considering how to embed aspects of it into their own methodologies for creating effective learning. Personally, I cannot point to a better structure that is more compelling in which to include Performance Support [PS]. 70:20:10 does indeed embrace PS; however I would take this “blend” and “extend it” even more broadly…

About Gary Wise

Effective knowledge transfer, the primary objective of training, does not actually achieve the business goal of COMPETENCY – instead, training only drives POTENTIAL. Competency is only reached over time at a new, post-training ground zero – the POINT-Of-WORK.

* * *

The current Training paradigm can no longer keep pace with the velocity of business demand and the continuous nature of change; especially when demand and change are both manifesting exclusively at the Point-of-Work.

* * *

The rules of engagement to sustain workforce performance have changed – so too must our paradigm.

* * *

A Learning Performance Paradigm represents disruptive innovation with direct implications on sustained workforce learning performance on a continuum that spans from Point-of-Entry to the Point-of-Work.

* * *

Are you ready to make the shift?
Or more importantly...
Are you at a state of readiness to adopt Change?

* * *

We should chat!

Living in Learning Ranked as a Top Blog in 2018!

Thank you to my readers! I appreciate all of you who follow this blog!

Search Blog – Enter Keyword

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

About

Gary Wise is a Workforce Performance Consultant with more than 30 years of experience in delivering results for a range of companies, including Fortune 500 enterprises. If your organization is ready to pursue a Point-of-Work discipline, Gary can help assess and map a path to readiness to sustain your efforts.